88412 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 244 / Thursday, December 21, 2023 / Notices 

1Based on the Government’s submissions in its 

RFAA dated September 7, 2023, the Agency finds 

that service of the OSC on Registrant was adequate. 

Specifically, the Government’s Notice of Service of 

Order to Show Cause included as an attachment a 

Form DEA–12 signed by Registrant indicating that 

Registrant was personally served with the OSC on 

July 19, 2023. RFAAX 1, at 6. 

Numurus LLC, Seattle, WA; ODU–USA, 

Inc., Camarillo, CA; Photodon, LLC, 

Traverse City, MI; Pi Innovo LLC, 

Plymouth, MI; Precision Advanced 

Machining Co., Clinton Township, MI; 

Quantum Ventura Inc., Los Angeles, CA; 

Real-Time Analyzers, Inc., Middletown, 

CT; ServiceNow, Santa Clara, CA; 

Steelhead Composites, Golden, CO; 

Systematic Inc., Centreville, VA; 

T.E.A.M., Inc., Woonsocket, RI; The 

TireBall Company, Crestwood, KY; The 

University of Texas at Austin, Austin, 

TX; TORC Robotics, Blacksburg, VA; 

Triad Services Group Inc., Madison 

Heights, MI; University of Delaware 

Center for Composite Materials, Newark, 

DE; Virginia Polytechnic Institute and 

State University, Blacksburg, VA; 

VITEC, Inc., Atlanta, GA; Volans-I, San 

Francisco, CA; XPER (formerly IbisTek), Butler, PA; YawPITCH, LLC, 

Holland, MI, and during GFY 2023, 

Abaco Systems, Huntsville, AL; Acrow 

Corp of America, Inc., Parsippany, NJ; 

Aegis Systems Inc. (Actuate), New York, 

NY; AMBOT, Reno, NV; AmSafe, Inc., 

Phoenix, AZ; AOM Engineering 

Solutions LLC, Dearborn Heights, MI; 

API Heat Transfer, Inc., Buffalo, NY; 

Applied Minds, LLC, Burbank, CA; 

APT-Research, Inc., Huntsville, AL; 

Armag Corporation, Bardstown, KY; 

ASRC Federal Mission Solutions, 

Moorestown, NJ; ATI Inc. (Alloy 

Technology Innovations Inc.), 

Lexington, KY; Autonodyne LLC, 

Boston, MA; B&H INTERNATIONAL 

LLC, BAKERSFIELD, CA; BlackBar 

Engineering, Sierra Vista, AZ; CAMX 

Power LLC, Lexington, MA; Clemson 

University—College of Engineering and 

Science, Clemson, SC; CP Technologies 

LLC (Chassis Plans LLC), Prescott, AZ; 

D–2 Incorporated, Bourne, MA; 

DataRobot, Boston, MA; DB Santasalo— 

USA, Greer, SC; Deep Analytics LLC, 

Montpelier, VT; Dell Technologies, 

Apex, NC; DOLL America Inc., 

Allenwood, NJ; DroneShield LLC, 

Warrenton, VA; Eck Industries, Inc., 

Manitowoc, WI; Essex Electro 

Engineers, Inc, Schaumburg, IL; Fenix 

Group Inc., Chantilly, VA; FPH USA, 

Roseville, MI; Future Tense LLC dba 

CalypsoAI Labs, Richmond, VA; Gen3 

Defense and Aerospace LLC, Grand 

Rapids, MI; General Electric Aviation 

Systems, LLC, Grand Rapids, MI; 

Georgia Tech Applied Research 

Corporation (Georgia Tech Research 

Corporation), Atlanta, GA; Grand Valley 

Mfg, Titusville, PA; Great Lakes Systems 

& Technology LLC, Chesterfield Twp, 

MI; Gunite Corporation (Accuride 

Corporation), Rockford, IL; Hamilton 

Sundstrand Corporation (Colins 

Aerospace Company), Rockford, IL; 

Intelligent Automation, Inc., Rockville, 

MD; International Logistics Systems, 

Inc., Glen Rock, PA; Janus 

Communications, Irvine, CA; Jaxon 

Engineering and Maintenance, LLC, 

Colorado Springs, CO; Jenoptik 

Advanced Systems, LLC, Rochester 

Hills, MI; JWF Defense Systems, 

Johnstown, PA; Keshik Mobile Power 

Systems, Northborough, MA; L3Harris 

Technologies √ Link Training & 

Simulation, Arlington, TX; L3 

TECHNOLOGIES INC. 

COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS WEST 

OPERATING DIVISION, Salt Lake City, 

UT; Macomb Community College, 

Warren, MI; MAK Technologies, 

Orlando, FL; Maxar Space Robotics LLC 

(formerly SSL Robotics LLC), Pasadena, 

CA; Mayer Alloys Corporation, 

Ferndale, MI; Metalbuilt LLC, 

Chesterfield, MI; Michigan Engineering 

Services, LLC, Ann Arbor, MI; Microsoft 

Corporation, Redmond, WA; NetCentric 

Technology, LLC, Neptune, NJ; NINOX

360 LLC, Redwood City, CA; Nu-Trek, 

Inc., San Diego, CA; O’Gara-Hess & 

Eisenhardt Armoring Company LLC, 

Fairfield, OH; Onodi Tool & 

Engineering, Melvindale, MI; Patriot 

Products Inc, Franklin, IN; PD Systems, 

Sterling Heights, MI; PHUOC LUONG 

dba TWF ENTERPRISE, San Jose, CA; 

Planck Aerosystems, San Diego, CA; 

Quantum Research International, Inc., 

Huntsville, AL; Rebellion Defense, Inc., 

Washington, DC; Red Berry Innovations, 

Inc., Springfield, NE; Red Hat 

Professional Consulting, Inc., Raleigh, 

NC; Regents of the University of 

Michigan, Dearborn, MI; Remotec Inc 

(formerly Northrop Grumman Remotec), 

Clinton, TN; Reveal Technology Inc, 

San Carlos, CA; Robo-Team NA, Inc., 

Rockville, MD; Robotire, Inc., Canton, 

MI; SAPA Transmission, Inc., Fort 

Lauderdale, FL; Sarcos LC, Salt Lake 

City, UT; Seco USA, Inc, Rockville, MD; 

Senseeker Engineering, Santa Barbara, 

CA; Shield AI, San Diego, CA; Silicon 

Forest Electronics, Vancouver, WA; 

Sonalysts, Inc., Waterford, CT; Spear 

Power Systems Inc., Grandview, MO; 

Spectra Technologies, LLC, East 

Camden, AR; Stephens Pneumatics, 

Inc., Haslet, TX; Syntonics LLC, 

Columbia, MD; Technology Service 

Corporation, Arlington, VA; TeleSwivel, 

LLC, Durham, NC; TexPower, Inc., 

Austin, TX; The Entwistle Company, 

Hudson, MA; Underground Pipeline, 

INC, Eagle, WI; University of Texas at 

Arlington (Research Institute), 

Arlington, TX; and VRC Metals Systems, 

LLC, Box Elder, SD, have withdrawn as 

parties to this venture. 

No other changes have been made in 

either the membership or planned 

activity of the group research project. 

Membership in this group research 

project remains open, and NAMC 

intends to file additional written 

notifications disclosing all changes in 

membership. 

On October 15, 2009, NAMC filed its 

original notification pursuant to section 

6(a) of the Act. The Department of 

Justice published a notice in the Federal 

Register pursuant to section 6(b) of the 

Act on November 30, 2009 (52 FR 8375). 

The last notification was filed with 

the Department on October 17, 2022. A 

notice was published in the Federal 

Register pursuant to section 6(b) of the 

Act on November 8, 2022 (87 FR 67488). 

Suzanne Morris, 

Deputy Director Civil Enforcement 

Operations, Antitrust Division. 

[FR Doc. 2023–28139 Filed 12–20–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Drug Enforcement Administration 

Joeseph Potter, D.D.S.; Decision and 

Order 

On July 12, 2023, the Drug 

Enforcement Administration (DEA or 

Government) issued an Order to Show 

Cause (OSC) to Joeseph Potter, D.D.S. 

(Registrant). Request for Final Agency 

Action (RFAA), Exhibit (RFAAX) 2, at 1, 

3. The OSC proposed the revocation of 

Registrant’s Certificate of Registration 

No. FP7517456 at the registered address 

of 3145 Larimer Street, Denver, 

Colorado 80205. Id. at 1. The OSC 

alleged that Registrant’s registration 

should be revoked because Registrant is 

‘‘currently without authority to 

prescribe, administer, dispense, or 

otherwise handle controlled substances 

in the State of Colorado, the state in 

which [he is] registered with DEA.’’ Id. 

at 2 (citing 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3)). 

The OSC notified Registrant of his 

right to file with DEA a written request 

for hearing, and that if he failed to file 

such a request, he would be deemed to 

have waived his right to a hearing and 

be in default. Id. (citing 21 CFR 

1301.43). Here, Registrant did not 

request a hearing. RFAA, at 1–2.1 ‘‘A 

default, unless excused, shall be 

deemed to constitute a waiver of the 

registrant’s/applicant’s right to a hearing 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 244 / Thursday, December 21, 2023 / Notices 88413 

2Under the Administrative Procedure Act, an 

agency ‘‘may take official notice of facts at any stage 

in a proceeding—even in the final decision.’’ 

United States Department of Justice, Attorney 

General’s Manual on the Administrative Procedure 

Act 80 (1947) (Wm. W. Gaunt & Sons, Inc., Reprint 

1979). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 556(e), ‘‘[w]hen an 

agency decision rests on official notice of a material 

fact not appearing in the evidence in the record, a 

party is entitled, on timely request, to an 

opportunity to show the contrary.’’ Accordingly, 

Registrant may dispute the Agency’s finding by 

filing a properly supported motion for 

reconsideration of findings of fact within fifteen 

calendar days of the date of this Order. Any such 

motion and response shall be filed and served by 

email to the other party and to DEA Office of the 

Administrator, Drug Enforcement Administration at 

dea.addo.attorneys@dea.gov. 

3This rule derives from the text of two provisions 

of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). First, 

Congress defined the term ‘‘practitioner’’ to mean 

‘‘a physician . . . or other person licensed, 

registered, or otherwise permitted, by . . . the 

jurisdiction in which he practices . . ., to 

distribute, dispense, . . . [or] administer . . . a 

controlled substance in the course of professional 

practice.’’ 21 U.S.C. 802(21). Second, in setting the 

requirements for obtaining a practitioner’s 

registration, Congress directed that ‘‘[t]he Attorney 

General shall register practitioners . . . if the 

applicant is authorized to dispense . . . controlled 

substances under the laws of the State in which he 

practices.’’ 21 U.S.C. 823(g)(1) (this section, 

formerly 823(f), was redesignated as part of the 

Medical Marijuana and Cannabidiol Research 

Expansion Act, Public Law 117–215, 136 Stat. 2257 

(2022)). Because Congress has clearly mandated that 

a practitioner possess state authority in order to be 

deemed a practitioner under the CSA, DEA has held 

repeatedly that revocation of a practitioner’s 

registration is the appropriate sanction whenever he 

is no longer authorized to dispense controlled 

substances under the laws of the state in which he 

practices. See, e.g., James L. Hooper, 76 FR 71371– 

72; Sheran Arden Yeates, D.O., 71 FR 39130, 39131 

(2006); Dominick A. Ricci, D.O., 58 FR 51104, 51105 

(1993); Bobby Watts, D.O., 53 FR 11919, 11920 

(1988); Frederick Marsh Blanton, 43 FR 27617. 

and an admission of the factual 

allegations of the [OSC].’’ 21 CFR 

1301.43(e). 

Further, ‘‘[i]n the event that a 

registrant . . . is deemed to be in 

default . . . DEA may then file a request 

for final agency action with the 

Administrator, along with a record to 

support its request. In such 

circumstances, the Administrator may 

enter a default final order pursuant to 

[21 CFR] § 1316.67.’’ Id. § 1301.43(f)(1). 

Here, the Government has requested 

final agency action based on Registrant’s 

default pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.43(c), 

(f), 1301.46. RFAA, at 3; see also 21 CFR 

1316.67. 

Findings of Fact 

The Agency finds that, in light of 

Registrant’s default, the factual 

allegations in the OSC are admitted. 

According to the OSC, the Colorado 

Dental Board issued an Order of 

Suspension, effective October 12, 2022, 

suspending Registrant from the practice 

of dentistry in the state of Colorado. 

RFAAX 2, at 2. According to Colorado 

online records, of which the Agency 

takes official notice, Registrant’s 

Colorado dental license remains 

suspended.’’ 2 Colorado Division of 

Professions and Occupations License 

Search, https://apps2.colorado.gov/ 

dora///licenselookup.aspx (last visited 

date of signature of this Order). 

Accordingly, the Agency finds that 

Registrant is not licensed to practice 

dentistry in Colorado, the state in which 

he is registered with DEA. 

Discussion 

Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3), the 

Attorney General is authorized to 

suspend or revoke a registration issued 

under 21 U.S.C. 823 ‘‘upon a finding 

that the registrant . . . has had his State 

license or registration suspended . . . 

[or] revoked . . . by competent State 

authority and is no longer authorized by 

State law to engage in the . . . 

dispensing of controlled substances.’’ 

With respect to a practitioner, DEA has 

also long held that the possession of 

authority to dispense controlled 

substances under the laws of the state in 

which a practitioner engages in 

professional practice is a fundamental 

condition for obtaining and maintaining 

a practitioner’s registration. See, e.g., 

James L. Hooper, D.O., 76 FR 71371, 

71372 (2011), pet. for rev. denied, 481 

F. App’x 826 (4th Cir. 2012); Frederick 

Marsh Blanton, D.O., 43 FR 27616, 

27617 (1978).3

According to Colorado statute, 

‘‘[e]very person who manufactures, 

distributes, or dispenses any controlled 

substance within this state . . . shall 

obtain . . . a registration, issued by the 

respective licensing board . . . . For 

purposes of this section and this article 

[ ], ‘registration’ or ‘registered’ means 

. . . the licensing of dentists by the 

Colorado dental board . . . .’’ Colo. 

Rev. Stat. 18–18–302(1) (2023). 

Here, the undisputed evidence in the 

record is that Registrant lacks authority 

to practice dentistry in Colorado. As 

discussed above, a dentist must be a 

licensed practitioner to dispense a 

controlled substance in Colorado. Thus, 

because Registrant lacks authority to 

practice dentistry in Colorado and, 

therefore, is not authorized to handle 

controlled substances in Colorado, 

Registrant is not eligible to maintain a 

DEA registration. Accordingly, the 

Agency will order that Registrant’s DEA 

registration be revoked. 

Order 

Pursuant to 28 CFR 0.100(b) and the 

authority vested in me by 21 U.S.C. 

824(a), I hereby revoke DEA Certificate 

of Registration No. FP7517456 issued to 

Joeseph Potter, D.D.S. Further, pursuant 

to 28 CFR 0.100(b) and the authority 

vested in me by 21 U.S.C. 823(g)(1), I 

hereby deny any pending applications 

of Joeseph Potter, D.D.S, to renew or 

modify this registration, as well as any 

other pending application of Joeseph 

Potter, D.D.S., for additional registration 

in Colorado. This Order is effective 

January 22, 2024. 

Signing Authority 

This document of the Drug 

Enforcement Administration was signed 

on December 12, 2023, by Administrator 

Anne Milgram. That document with the 

original signature and date is 

maintained by DEA. For administrative 

purposes only, and in compliance with 

requirements of the Office of the Federal 

Register, the undersigned DEA Federal 

Register Liaison Officer has been 

authorized to sign and submit the 

document in electronic format for 

publication, as an official document of 

DEA. This administrative process in no 

way alters the legal effect of this 

document upon publication in the 

Federal Register. 

Heather Achbach, 

Federal Register Liaison Officer, Drug 

Enforcement Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2023–28013 Filed 12–20–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–09–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Drug Enforcement Administration 

Mark Young, M.D.; Decision and Order 

On July 14, 2023, the Drug 

Enforcement Administration (DEA or 

Government) issued an Order to Show 

Cause (OSC) to Mark R. Young, M.D. 

(Registrant). Request for Final Agency 

Action (RFAA), Exhibit (RFAAX) 2, at 1, 

3. The OSC proposed the revocation of 

Registrant’s Certificate of Registration 

No. BY9053240 at the registered address 

of 401 23rd Street Suite 207, Glenwood 

Springs, Colorado 81601. Id. at 1. The 

OSC alleged that Registrant’s 

registration should be revoked because 

Registrant is ‘‘currently without 

authority to prescribe, administer, 

dispense, or otherwise handle 

controlled substances in Colorado, the 

state in which [he is] registered with 

DEA.’’ Id. at 2 (citing 21 U.S.C. 

824(a)(3)). 

The OSC notified Registrant of his 

right to file with DEA a written request 

for hearing, and that if he failed to file 

such a request, he would be deemed to 

have waived his right to a hearing and 

be in default. Id. (citing 21 CFR 

1301.43). Here, Registrant did not 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES